You guys do realize that if we trade Romo we lose about $4m in cap space... right?

Don't worry MH, your man-crush isn't going to be traded. You need not worry about having to cry yourself to sleep anytime soon because your obsession is off the team. Jerry won't get rid of him because he makes too much money on him, regardless of how well or poorly he performs. Romo is a mealticket, and Jerry is going to ride that gravy train for as long as he can and milk him for every dime he's worth.

I post a fact and you go troll? Sounds like SOP for you P9 - trying to join your boyfriend on the ban list?

Can u prove that he kept Romo because he was a meal ticket? I think he kept Romo because he a pretty good QB, those would be opinions plan , not facts. MH having a man crush on Romo is prolly a fact but I would need to see some evidence on that

I can't see Ware to Pitt at all. Too many olb types in this draft and like you said Star they build throught the draft. I still think Ware to the Pats is the best option.

If we trade Romo and Ware I want to defer the first rounders we would get for them to next year and use the lower picks in the 2013 draft.

iF they were to trade both, Wouldn't you want one of them for this season or would are you banking on getting a top tier QB in 2014?

Yes. (in bold)

Also I if we traded Romo I would draft a qb this year too. However with 3 second rounders we could move into the first if need be or stay put and draft o line , d line and safety help with that many picks. Have 3 first rounders next season gives you the most leverage in the draft and you might could parlay some of those to first in future drafts kind of like the Pats do._________________A circle. The direction the Cowboys continue to travel.

Sure, Dallas saves down the road, but if what I've seen is true and Dallas is already $18M in the red, how does eating $17M make trading either feasible?_________________Kiltman on sigRYAN RUSSELL FAN CLUB

IMO, unless we are offered a multiple firsts and other picks, I say no. Also, for those of you who you spotrac.com for contracts, for individual players the last column is named 'cap hit'. It probably should be named 'cap number'. Cap hit to me, means hit if cut or traded.

Last edited by GeneralDissaray on Wed Jan 09, 2013 1:41 pm; edited 1 time in total

If he's cut or traded, we eat $14,972,333 and only save his $11.5m salary so we'd be paying $3.5m not to have him on our roster.

That's not technically correct. The savings or loss is based on what his total cap charge would be for the season less the total accelerated onto the cap by cutting or trading him. In this case, if the numbers above are correct, Romo's total 2013 cap number is $17.228M and his remaining bonus money is $14.972M, so releasing him saves $2.256M against the cap.

The reason it's calculated that way is because the 2013 signing bonus money is already accounted for in his 2013 number, so subtracting out the total remaining bonus money is evening both sides of the accounting ledger to ensure that zero contractual dollars remain._________________Co-Founder: DCRA - No McQuistan, No Super Bowl

If he's cut or traded, we eat $14,972,333 and only save his $11.5m salary so we'd be paying $3.5m not to have him on our roster.

That's not technically correct. The savings or loss is based on what his total cap charge would be for the season less the total accelerated onto the cap by cutting or trading him. In this case, if the numbers above are correct, Romo's total 2013 cap number is $17.228M and his remaining bonus money is $14.972M, so releasing him saves $2.256M against the cap.

The reason it's calculated that way is because the 2013 signing bonus money is already accounted for in his 2013 number, so subtracting out the total remaining bonus money is evening both sides of the accounting ledger to ensure that zero contractual dollars remain.

You mean I was actually right for once? I'm used to missing some small thing, and looking like an idiot.

No problem at all. The math always appears weird because it winds up looking like the guaranteed money is either being paid for twice or being removed twice until you see it on a balance sheet._________________Co-Founder: DCRA - No McQuistan, No Super Bowl

As others mentioned, I dont think Ware is trad-able from a financial stand point.

I dont think Romo is trad-able from a necessity stand point, but if we were to trade him, it would have to be for a 1st and 2nd - minimum.

Agreed. Trading Ware would be difficult and the only way to justify the salary cap cost of trading Romo (i.e., paying "x" in dead money for nothing) would be if we received a boatload of high round draft picks as compensation.

Quote:

I think the best chances are from a new coach, or one on the hotseat:

Jags
Cheifs
Cards
Jets
Bills
Browns
Titans
Bucs

Could all be teams that would make a play. Some are less likely than other, obviously.

Of those teams, the only ones whom I can see that would have genuine interest would be the Jags, Jets, and Cards. And even the Jets are a toss-up due to the potential economic impact of Sanchez' extension. I still can't figure out why the Jets gave him that deal. The guy is a REALLY bad QB._________________Co-Founder: DCRA - No McQuistan, No Super Bowl

As others mentioned, I dont think Ware is trad-able from a financial stand point.

I dont think Romo is trad-able from a necessity stand point, but if we were to trade him, it would have to be for a 1st and 2nd - minimum.

Agreed. Trading Ware would be difficult and the only way to justify the salary cap cost of trading Romo (i.e., paying "x" in dead money for nothing) would be if we received a boatload of high round draft picks as compensation.

Quote:

I think the best chances are from a new coach, or one on the hotseat:

Jags
Cheifs
Cards
Jets
Bills
Browns
Titans
Bucs

Could all be teams that would make a play. Some are less likely than other, obviously.

Of those teams, the only ones whom I can see that would have genuine interest would be the Jags, Jets, and Cards. And even the Jets are a toss-up due to the potential economic impact of Sanchez' extension. I still can't figure out why the Jets gave him that deal. The guy is a REALLY bad QB.

While I think a lot of the players question Romo's ability to come through in season ending games, I'm sure the 30+ crowd(Ware, Ratliff, Hatcher, Witten) does not want to waste the final years of their career developing a rookie. IMO, if we trade Romo, we might as well trade Ware, and I want Ware to retire a Cowboy. Don't see a point in trading Romo, if Garrett is still here.